From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1116ece181be1aea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-06 16:26:02 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3F81F9FA.7000707@noplace.com> From: Marin David Condic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 (OEM-HPQ-PRS1C03) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? References: <3F7AC5B0.9080108@noplace.com> <3F7B7641.9030908@noplace.com> <3F7C8482.20102@comcast.net> <3F7D69EA.5030707@noplace.com> <3F7E2740.1050703@comcast.net> <3F7EBD85.8080205@noplace.com> <3F7ED11A.9070500@comcast.net> <3F7F373C.1060705@noplace.com> <3F81A1B3.8050205@cogeco.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 23:26:01 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.165.24.173 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net 1065482761 209.165.24.173 (Mon, 06 Oct 2003 16:26:01 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 16:26:01 PDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:342 Date: 2003-10-06T23:26:01+00:00 List-Id: But that's the point of "standardizing" without really "standardizing". Having a library that is "Conventional" but without being in the standard allows you to try different flavors of things and settle ultimately on that which gains majority acceptance. MDC Warren W. Gay VE3WWG wrote: > Marin David Condic wrote: > >> Now if there were some standardized Ada binding to databases (ODBC or >> whatever you like - so long as it is standard and The Ada Way) - I >> could maybe see some goodness in Bounded_String for that sort of thing. > > > I personally believe that it is probably too early to standardize on > database access. The problem is that they vary way too much. Some > support row ids (most), while others do not (MySQL). Some sort of > support row ids (Informix: can duplicate depending upon database table > layout). > > MySQL avoids row ids completely. They insist on serial values, but they > do serial values their own way. Just about every other vendor supports > serial values (or sequences in yet another way). > > Databases vary in their fetch capabilities. Some support random row > fetches, others only sequentially. Some require you fetch all of the > results (MySQL), while others allow you to just fetch the rows you > feel like (PostgreSQL for example). Others require you to declare > a cursor, like Sybase for random fetches, and the privilege of > fetching only the rows you want. > > And this is just a sampling of the differences, and we havn't even > touched on SQL syntax and data type names yet. > > ODBC tries to dumb down these differences, but a number of these > issues still come through. I am fielding many of these complications > as I continue to add more support to APQ for different database > platforms. > > Warren. > -- > http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg > -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g "All reformers, however strict their social conscience, live in houses just as big as they can pay for." --Logan Pearsall Smith ======================================================================